3 ms·
Really. Quite combative. Drawing conclusions for whichever labels I present, when I did not specify how I might choose to apply the labels. Do you see where yo
by whyIndeed 11y ago
Really. Quite combative.
Drawing conclusions for whichever labels I present, when I did not specify how I might choose to apply the labels. Do you see where you're jumping to conclusions about my disposition yet?
My last words to you are this:
A burning death after mutilation is cruelty. The aggressors are torturing and burning the victims. The murdered suffering before the mob are victims. Everyone else witnessing the events is a spectator, although some of the spectators may be accomplices to the aggressors. Evidence for many of these events will surely be incomplete, and likely skewed. Without evidence in any direction how would anyone know.
But you, you're lashng out at people on the internet. At some point you marked me as an enemy. Maybe you'll realize you misread my remarks. Oh well, done with this conversation. I won't be replying to you again.
- ivoryst 11y agoYou obviously have a good grasp of vocabulary, but use it to obfuscate rather than communicate. You could of-course speak plainly about what you really mean, but that would unmask your true prejudices, wouldn't it? And yes, from the negro burnt to death in the american south; the salem witch-hunts of the early settlers and the same in PNG, it is all barbaric.